MOTILAL KALA Vs. HARI GOVIND RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal from a judgment of Deb J. delivered on November 5, 1976, on an application under Article 226 of the constitution, we are called upon to consture the relevant provisions of Rule 9 (1) (b) (ii) of the west Bengal Board of Secondary Education (Manner of Hearing and deciding Appeals by Appeal Committee)Regulations, 1964.

(2.) THE respondent Hari Govind rai was an assistant teacher of Digambar Jain Vidyalaya. The managing committee of the Vidyalaya dismissed him from service. He filed an appeal to the Appeal Committee constituted under section 18 of the West Bengal board of Secondary Education Act, 1963. The Appeal Committee held that his dismissal was wrongful. The Appeal committee directed the managing committee to pay gratuity to him in lieu of reinstatement. The respondent was aggrieved by the Appeal Committee's decision. He made an application to this court under article 226 of the Constitution for writs in the nature of mandamus and certiorari for quashing the Appeal committee's order. His case is that the appeal Committee should have made an order for reinstatement. Let us read the relevant provisions of Rule 9 of the Appeal Regulations. These provisions are as follows :

(3.) FROM the above provisions, it appears that when an appeal is preferred to the Appeal Committee, the committee has three alternatives. The first alternative is to allow the appeal and make an order directing reinstatement with or without consequential relief if the Appeal Committee is of opinion that such reinstatement is (a) appropriate and (b) proper. The second alternative is to allow the appeal and make an order directing payment of gratuity up to a maximum of 12 months' salary if the Appeal Committee is of opinion that such payment of gratuity would be appropriate relief to the appellant instead of making an order for reinstatement. The third alternative is to dismiss the appeal when there are no grounds for interference with the order of dismissal. The Appeal Committee is enjoined to lake into consideration all relevant materials placed before it and record its reasons for its decision.